Diamond Advice - upgrading my wife's ring

[Lance_Alot]

Hi there,

I'm a newbie poster, and I'm considering upgrading my wife's engagement ring for our 10 year anniversary. She and I have discussed, and she wants a traditional round diamond with platinum setting, and she THINKS she is good with 1.5 to 1.75 carats. I'm personally leaning toward the later. Her original ring is a 0.85 carat, H color, Ideal cut, VS1 from Blue Nile. It is eyeclean and she actually gets compliments for it's fire, but I can now comfortably afford something bigger.

Here is the ring that I'm looking at. It seems to score pretty well using the tool on this site, but I don't want to screw something up considering this is going to cost me $18K. I also saw a somewhat smaller (1.6 ct) ring that was a Signature Ideal cut, but this one seemed to get better scores, and it is larger. I wonder if the Signature Ideal on Blue Nile is neccessiarly a better buy or just a marketing ploy. Anyways, here you go, and thanks in advance:

Ring - Carat weight:1.72, Cut: Ideal, Color:F, Clarity: VS2, Depth %: 61.3%, Table %:, 58%, Polish: Excellent, Symmetry: Excellent, Girdle: Medium to Medium, Culet:None, Fluorescence: Medium Blue, Measurements:, 7.70 x 7.67 x 4.71 mm, Crown Height 15, Crown Angle 36, Pavillion Depth 42.5

Lance

 

[Stive85]

Hi there,

I'm a newbie poster, and I'm considering upgrading my wife's engagement ring for our 10 year anniversary. She and I have discussed, and she wants a traditional round diamond with platinum setting, and she THINKS she is good with 1.5 to 1.75 carats. I'm personally leaning toward the later. Her original ring is a 0.85 carat, H color, Ideal cut, VS1 from Blue Nile. It is eyeclean and she actually gets compliments for it's fire, but I can now comfortably afford something bigger.

Here is the ring that I'm looking at. It seems to score pretty well using the tool on this site, but I don't want to screw something up considering this is going to cost me $18K. I also saw a somewhat smaller (1.6 ct) ring that was a Signature Ideal cut, but this one seemed to get better scores, and it is larger. I wonder if the Signature Ideal on Blue Nile is neccessiarly a better buy or just a marketing ploy. Anyways, here you go, and thanks in advance:

Ring - Carat weight:1.72, Cut: Ideal, Color:F, Clarity: VS2, Depth %: 61.3%, Table %:, 58%, Polish: Excellent, Symmetry: Excellent, Girdle: Medium to Medium, Culet:None, Fluorescence: Medium Blue, Measurements:, 7.70 x 7.67 x 4.71 mm, Crown Height 15, Crown Angle 36, Pavillion Depth 42.5

Lance

Love the blue fluor.. This one is from Blue Nile too? Nothing against them, they're a giant company. Only problem is that you essentially are buying blind, and have to return the diamond if it doesn't appraise to what you expected... just a hassle.

That being said, it's hard for people on here to help without at least pics of the stone (which you probably wont get) and IS and/or ASET (def wont get).

Personally I would go with a vendor who can offer all these things to you prior to buying, so that you know what your getting. ESPECIALLY spending that much. Plus all the experts on here will be able to really help you if they can see those images.

 

[ecf8503]

If the numbers you listed are correct (you said pavillion depth not pavillion angle) the HCA is quite good. (1.0, FIC) and with the steep crown angle may result in more fire (colored light return).

Ideally you need an idealscope image now to assess light performance, unfortunately BN can't do that.

Is there a reason you are planning on buying from BN? If I had that kind of money to spend I'd want to make sure I got the absolute top of the line performer, which would lead me to Brian Gavin, High Performance Diamonds, Whiteflash, and Good Old Gold. All of them will work up the stone to the nth degree so you know exactly what you are getting.

How are you planning on setting it?

 

[Lance_Alot]

Thanks for the responses. I purchased her last ring at BN, so I am hoping to get a trade in. Between that and a rebate from Fatwallet, I'm looking at a $4K credit. I am very open to looking elsewhere if that doesn't materialize, but there is an element of trust with buying from Blue Nile. I'm also cautious of buying retail...at least here in San Francisco. You are much less likely to get a deal based on pricing of jewelry and pretty much so everything in this city, so I like the "fair" pricing element of Blue Nile.

 

[Lance_Alot]

Forgot to mention the setting. It is the Monique Lhuillier Solitaire setting from Blue Nile. She currently has a BN cathedral setting, and we could in theory reuse that.

 

[LLJsmom]

If you want to use BNs trade in policy, buy yourself an idealscope off this website, learn how to use it and buy the stone loose from BN. When u get it, take pictures and post them for the experts for opinions. Be mentally ready to return it and try again if you don't pick a winner the first time. If these hearts and arrows are not your top priority, I think it's possible to get a beautiful diamond off BN. It may take more time, work and mailing back and forth. I have returned high ticket items to BN and they make it very easy. Just my 2c. Good luck.

 

[bunnycat]

If you want to use BNs trade in policy, buy yourself an idealscope off this website, learn how to use it and buy the stone loose from BN. When u get it, take pictures and post them for the experts for opinions. Be mentally ready to return it and try again if you don't pick a winner the first time. If these hearts and arrows are not your top priority, I think it's possible to get a beautiful diamond off BN. It may take more time, work and mailing back and forth. I have returned high ticket items to BN and they make it very easy. Just my 2c. Good luck.

This could be a really good option for you. It might give you a way to have all your cake and eat it too, as they say. The little Idealscopes are very easy to use (a little easier IMO if you get the little lighted dock to go with it in one kit) and you can post links to the stone so people can see the cert info and still look at the IS image that is so helpful. Plus you'd still get your trade in and credits!

 

[Lance_Alot]

Thx again. I will consider just ordering it as a diamond only and inspecting it with an ideal scope. The only issue there is that she really does like the BN mount as well. I did receive an image for it (not great quality), and I am attaching it here.

 

[Lance_Alot]

Sorry, I had another question since you all have been so helpful.

First of all, I confirmed that I can trade in my ring, so the new one will be coming from Blue Nile! With that said, I'm wondering if I would be better off looking at something with slightly more inclusions (S1)or more color (like a G/H). Obviously, I will confirm that is is not hazy and is eyeclean, but I don't want to spend money unneccessarily. Some of the reading on this site has me second guessing the value of F color and VS2 to be honest. The difference in price will be $2-$3K.

 

[bunnycat]

Sorry, I had another question since you all have been so helpful.

First of all, I confirmed that I can trade in my ring, so the new one will be coming from Blue Nile! With that said, I'm wondering if I would be better off looking at something with slightly more inclusions (S1)or more color (like a G/H). Obviously, I will confirm that is is not hazy and is eyeclean, but I don't want to spend money unneccessarily. Some of the reading on this site has me second guessing the value of F color and VS2 to be honest. The difference in price will be $2-$3K.

I think part of it will be her/your color tolerance. Color is a personal preference rather than an absolute just as amount of inclusions are. For me, as long as I can't see anything (and hey, at over 40, that's not too hard to manage) I'm fine with it. It surely can't hurt to have a look and a peek with an idealscope at home.

 

[Lance_Alot]

Well, I am getting close. I have now identified the following diamond that also looks decent and it is $2k less than my original choice:

Carat weight 1.71, Cut Ideal, Color F, Clarity SI1, Depth 61.5%, Table 56%, Polish very Good, Symmetry Excellent, Girdle Medium to Slightly Thick, Cutlet None, Fluorescence Strong, Measurements 7.69 x 7.70 x 4.73 mm, crown height 15, crown angle 34, pavilion depth 43, pavilion angle 40.8

I can obviously return if it doesn't work out, but any preferences between the above and my more expensive first choice. The specs for that one are as follows:

Ring - Carat weight:1.72, Cut: Ideal, Color:F, Clarity: VS2, Depth %: 61.3%, Table %:, 58%, Polish: Excellent, Symmetry: Excellent, Girdle: Medium to Medium, Culet:None, Fluorescence: Medium Blue, Measurements:, 7.70 x 7.67 x 4.71 mm, Crown Height 15, Crown Angle 36, Pavillion Depth 42.5, pavilion angle 40.6

Thanks again!

 

[bunnycat]

Well, I am getting close. I have now identified the following diamond that also looks decent and it is $2k less than my original choice:

Carat weight 1.71, Cut Ideal, Color F, Clarity SI1, Depth 61.5%, Table 56%, Polish very Good, Symmetry Excellent, Girdle Medium to Slightly Thick, Cutlet None, Fluorescence Strong, Measurements 7.69 x 7.70 x 4.73 mm, crown height 15, crown angle 34, pavilion depth 43, pavilion angle 40.8

I can obviously return if it doesn't work out, but any preferences between the above and my more expensive first choice. The specs for that one are as follows:

Ring - Carat weight:1.72, Cut: Ideal, Color:F, Clarity: VS2, Depth %: 61.3%, Table %:, 58%, Polish: Excellent, Symmetry: Excellent, Girdle: Medium to Medium, Culet:None, Fluorescence: Medium Blue, Measurements:, 7.70 x 7.67 x 4.71 mm, Crown Height 15, Crown Angle 36, Pavillion Depth 42.5, pavilion angle 40.6

Thanks again!

Barring being about to get both in to look at and take Idealscope images (which would be my first choice if I had enough cash), if I were in this position buying sight unseen (more or less), I'd be inclined to stick closer to the one that is closer to my comfort zone in terms of cut proportions (and that is the 1st one). If someone someone who knows more about stones outside of the usually recommended cut parameters has an opinion on the second one, I hope they chime in. For me, the steeper CA paired with the shallower PA wouldn't be something I'd go for if I couldn't see it and get images for it first, but that's just me, and I certainly don't have nearly as much experience a some of the people on this board.

 

[Lance_Alot]

Thanks, but I'm back to the drawing board. I explained to my wife what flouresence was this morning (along with showing her photos in the sun), and her expression said it all. I think I will need to look for something with no flour like the ring she has. She basically said "it would freak me out" if my ring looked blue in the sun, and "I'm OK just sticking with my current ring really". While I considered taking her up on the second comment, she deserves what she wants after being married to me for 10 years

Either way, I need to start over but I have a few decent options I believe.

 

[CanuckAB]

Have you tried putting the proportion info of those diamonds into the HCA tool? These diamonds will react differently in different lighting. If you haven't done so yet, you should read up on FICs, TICs and BICs on this site.

The first diamond (1.72c) scores a 1.9 and is a FIC (Fiery Ideal Cut). A score < 2 is a diamond that should be one with great performance. This one actually scores ex for fire but only VG for light return and scintillation as well as VG for spread (common to get VG for spread). If the pavilion angle was 40.5 to 40.1 then it would score ex on all but spread. I don't know if the 0.1 that this diamond is over on the pavilion angle would result in you being able to notice any difference in the brilliance and scintillation in the diamond. These numbers are rounded after all. I personally love the look of a FIC and think of them as little fireballs.

The second diamond (1.71c) scores a 1 and is a TIC (Tolkowshy Ideal Cut). A lower HCA score is not "better". Anything under 2 is what you are looking for and some people will also check into stones that score as high as 2.5 or so. The HCA says this stone is EX in light return, fire and scintillation and VG for spread. As you know, you should verify that this diamond is eye clean.

Too bad you don't have access to ideal-scopes. Good luck!

 

[CanuckAB]

Just saw that your wife doesn't want fluorescence. Guess I took too long typing.

The HCA info I just posted will still be of help as you resume your search. Look under TOOLS up above in the banner. Use it with any round brilliant diamond you are considering and it will help you discard diamonds with proportions that are not ideal.

Good luck!

 

[CanuckAB]

Sorry, I somehow missed that you were already using the HCA tool.

I found 3 AGS000 stones on Blue Nile in your lower size range. Perhaps they would be worth checking out? You do not use the HCA tool on these as AGS has already checked them for their performance.

http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-comparison/solitaires.html#DIAMONDCOMPARISON_STEP

 

[CanuckAB]

Here are another 2 slightly larger AGS000.

http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-comparison/solitaires.html#DIAMONDCOMPARISON_STEP

 

[bunnycat]

Thanks, but I'm back to the drawing board. I explained to my wife what flouresence was this morning (along with showing her photos in the sun), and her expression said it all. I think I will need to look for something with no flour like the ring she has. She basically said "it would freak me out" if my ring looked blue in the sun, and "I'm OK just sticking with my current ring really". While I considered taking her up on the second comment, she deserves what she wants after being married to me for 10 years

Either way, I need to start over but I have a few decent options I believe.

With medium blue fluor, it's not likely to do anything more than take a violet tinge on in the sun. It's not going to glow blue unless it's under a blacklight. Almost all the stones I currently have have at least a little fluor in them. One in particular I bought because of the medium fluor.

Here's a stone with medium blue fluor out in diffused sunlight:

 

[CanuckAB]

Apparently when I posted the link to the last 2 diamonds, it overrode the link to the first 3. Sorry, I'm new at this. I'm re posting the first 3 AGS 000 stones separately & hopefully I'm not erasing the other 2.


http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-search?pt=setform&track=NavDiaSeaRD#diamonds_pid=LD04146589

http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-search?pt=setform&track=NavDiaSeaRD#diamonds_pid=LD02607982

http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-search?pt=setform&track=NavDiaSeaRD#diamonds_pid=LD03556782

I agree about faint or med blue fluorescence not really being noticeable. I just bought a UV light and was surprised to find out that some of the stones in my eternity band and my anniversary band are actually fluorescent.

 

[LLJsmom]

Here is a recent pic of my medium blue fluor in diffuse sunlight on a sunny day.

I LOVE IT. I looks like you're looking into clear blue water. For reference, it's an F, VS1 and the band stones are H. The sides stones on the e-ring are E-F.



overcast day: On an overcast day, it looks really white.

 

[Lance_Alot]

Thank you all. I like the fluorescence, but my wife is hell bent against it. I also looked at the rings that Canuck posted, but they got snapped up quickly, and we think 1.7 ct is the ideal size. I have two new options and would love some thoughts.

Here is a first new ring that I'm considering. It scores 1.9 on the Holloway Cut advisor and 1B on the AGA scale with all one ratings. Unfortunately, it is only GIA rated. Price on this one is $18K.

VS2, Color G, 1.72 ct
Length:7.62
Width:7.65
Depth:4.77
Total Depth:62.48%
Table percent:56
Crown height:15
Girdle (from):Medium
Girdle (to):Medium
Polish:Excellent / Very Good
Symmetry:Excellent / Very Good
Crown angle:34.5
Pavilion depth:43.5
Pavilion angle: 41


Option 2 is $21K, and it is AGA 1A and HCA 1.7. it is also AGSL triple 0.

VS1, Color F, 1.64 ct
Length:7.56
Width:7.59
Depth:4.67
Total Depth:61.65%
Table percent:56
Crown height:15.1
Girdle (from):Thin
Girdle (to):Medium
Polish:Excellent / Very Good
Symmetry:Excellent / Very Good
Crown angle:34.8
Pavilion depth:43.1
Pavilion angle 40.9


Option 2 seems to be a terrific stone, but I'm not sure it is worth the extra $3K honestly. Let me know your thoughts, and thx again.

 

[bunnycat]

Either one could work, but I am partial to AGS stones myself. I think you'd just have to get one (or both) in and post pics (and idealscope) to have a look. FWIW the proportions you listed on the AGS 000 are very similar to the proportions for the stone I posted a picture of.

 

[CanuckAB]

If you post the links, we can check the inclusion plots of both stones and the ideal-scope of the AGS stone. I'd place on reserve any stones you are seriously considering first so they don't get picked up by someone else while you are deciding.

While the HCA on the 1st stone is 1.9, it scores EX for light return but VG for fire, scintillation and spread. You really need to see this stone in person to see how it performs because you don't have access to an ideal-scope from Blue Nile. The second stone is AGSL 000 so it's performance has been verified already. I've read on this site that you DO NOT use the HCA tool on AGSL 000 stones. They tend to be sold at a premium from what I understand. If the plot/inclusions/ideal-scope are ok, this should be a beautiful stone.

Good luck!

 

[Mikla]

Thank you all. I like the fluorescence, but my wife is hell bent against it. I also looked at the rings that Canuck posted, but they got snapped up quickly, and we think 1.7 ct is the ideal size. I have two new options and would love some thoughts.

Here is a first new ring that I'm considering. It scores 1.9 on the Holloway Cut advisor and 1B on the AGA scale with all one ratings. Unfortunately, it is only GIA rated. Price on this one is $18K.

VS2, Color G, 1.72 ct
Length:7.62
Width:7.65
Depth:4.77
Total Depth:62.48%
Table percent:56
Crown height:15
Girdle (from):Medium
Girdle (to):Medium
Polish:Excellent / Very Good
Symmetry:Excellent / Very Good
Crown angle:34.5
Pavilion depth:43.5
Pavilion angle: 41


Option 2 is $21K, and it is AGA 1A and HCA 1.7. it is also AGSL triple 0.

VS1, Color F, 1.64 ct
Length:7.56
Width:7.59
Depth:4.67
Total Depth:61.65%
Table percent:56
Crown height:15.1
Girdle (from):Thin
Girdle (to):Medium
Polish:Excellent / Very Good
Symmetry:Excellent / Very Good
Crown angle:34.8
Pavilion depth:43.1
Pavilion angle 40.9


Option 2 seems to be a terrific stone, but I'm not sure it is worth the extra $3K honestly. Let me know your thoughts, and thx again.

If she doesn't like fluorescence then avoid it at all costs. She's not going to learn to like it, even if you do.

 

[EFADiamonds]

Hi,

At the end of the day, diamonds have a strong affinity for oil and most rings...even the best of them...don't look their best on any given day. All of this ideal scope and light performance scores get completely washed out as soon as the diamond is dirty...which is almost all the time. As long as the diamond is an excellent cut and of a color and clarity you prefer..I believe you will be very happy with your purchase. There is no one perfect depth % or table, its the combination of a variety of proportions on the diamond. I work in online retail so I understand the concerns of buying site unseen...as a gemologist, we have no incentive to sell any diamond we think will be returned. I think you should purchase the diamond from whomever will give you the best value (especially considering your trade in). I think the increase in carat weight will be the most important wow factor of all these decisions!

Best of luck...

 

[Lance_Alot]

Ok, I found another one. It is promising, but it did get a lousy HCA score. Per your comments above though, I shouldn't worry about that though? Here is the link on Blue Nile. I have all of these on a temporary hold. I am leaning toward one of the first two, but I'm open to suggestions.

ttp://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD00444987?keyword_search_value=LD00444987

http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD04196273?keyword_search_value=LD04196273

http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD02417463?keyword_search_value=LD02417463

http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD03489376?keyword_search_value=LD03489376

 

[bunnycat]

Hi,

At the end of the day, diamonds have a strong affinity for oil and most rings...even the best of them...don't look their best on any given day. All of this ideal scope and light performance scores get completely washed out as soon as the diamond is dirty...which is almost all the time. As long as the diamond is an excellent cut and of a color and clarity you prefer..I believe you will be very happy with your purchase. There is no one perfect depth % or table, its the combination of a variety of proportions on the diamond. I work in online retail so I understand the concerns of buying site unseen...as a gemologist, we have no incentive to sell any diamond we think will be returned. I think you should purchase the diamond from whomever will give you the best value (especially considering your trade in). I think the increase in carat weight will be the most important wow factor of all these decisions!

Best of luck...

I'm actually trying to figure out how one comes to the conclusion that light performance is compromised if a diamond gets dirty and how that invalidates the general information you would get about leakage in a stone from an IS image? What is the definition of compromise? That would seem to be subjective. While you as a trade person may know by looking at numbers or other tricks how to pick a good stone, I personally find it refreshing that there are ways people can look at a stone's performance that don't require many months of study (ie- an idealscope image; its very easy to read.)

I have a Brian Gavin Blue (pictured earlier in the thread) and studs from the same vendor which I have yet to see be what I would call compromised in light performance, no matter how many times I touch it (though I do clean my rings regularly). I also have an Old European diamond both in a ring (avatar) and earrings which I also have yet to see light return compromised by my definition. They absolutely look better clean, but they surely don't look bad at any time I have seen! I can say the earrings and rings I have with stones in them that are not well cut (average mall quality material) do lose shine and brilliance when they are dirty.

 

[CanuckAB]

According to what I have read on this site, you do NOT use the HCA tool on AGS 000 diamonds. They only receive the 000 rating after being evaluated. The HCA tool is a rejection tool to help you eliminate diamonds that do not have ideal proportions that would probably result in poor performance. In a perfect world each diamond would be evaluated on a stone by stone basis for performance. GIA does not evaluate performance hence the reason to use the HCA tool. A score of <2 means the diamond is worth seeing &/or having further tests such as ideal-scope requested.

While I understand the importance of how angles etc work together to create diamonds with good performance, I'm just starting to look at ideal-scope images and plots. I wish someone with a lot more experience would come along and look at these. At larger sizes some inclusions are more noticeable than in smaller stones, even with VS1 clarity. For what it's worth, here are my thoughts when looking at the diamonds:

http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD00444987?keyword_search_value=LD00444987
This one has an older report (2006). Maybe it was pre-loved? While the plot looks really good, I see a lot of items listed under the Key to Symbols. Not sure what to make of it as I've never seen that many things listed before. The first item listed is supposed to be the thing that decided the clarity grade. It's almost as if back then they listed all possible inclusions here and then you looked at the plot to see which ones were on the diamond? If that is the case this is probably the one I like the most. Perhaps you could start a thread for just this one diamond and ask in the title for help from the experts?

http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD04196273?keyword_search_value=LD04196273
GIA stone with a HCA score of 1.9 that says Ex for light return, VG for fire, scintillation and spread. An ideal-scope would help here but as you don't have access to that, it needs to be seen. You should call and ask if it is eye clean. There's a crystal under the table and it may be visible, especially if dark in colour. This may be a very beautiful stone but I would probably go with the 1.71c below just because that one has already been checked for performance and they'll face up the same size (7.65 x 7.62 vs 7.62 x 7.6.

http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD02417463?keyword_search_value=LD02417463
The first inclusion listed is clouds. As this is an AGS 000 VS1 stone, I don't think that you need to worry about them.

http://www.bluenile.com/diamond-details/LD03489376?keyword_search_value=LD03489376
This stone has a large table at 59.3% and is SI1. You would need to see this stone to decide if you are comfortable with it. Some people love larger tables, some do not. You also should call and ask if this diamond is eye clean to your standards. Not sure how important that is to you.

Good Luck!

 

[Lance_Alot]

Canuck, you have been very helpful. You also confirmed where I was leaning -- stone 2 or 3. I had not noticed the date of the report on #1, but I decided it was a big price to pay for intangibles like F color and BN signature status...not even sure what that means

I am going to open a thread on my remaining two. Thx again!

 

[EFADiamonds]

When oil, grease, and dirt deposit on a diamond, it blocks light from bending at its maximum and you loose sparkle. Fire and brilliance are the spectral colors and flashes of white light that a diamond gives off when light bends within a diamond and then is released. When a diamond is dirty, light can't bounce around in the same way and the stone becomes more dull. This is also the same reason why a dirty diamond often allows inclusions to become more visible. When fire and brilliance are "compromised" by normal dirt & oil, the eye is able to look into the stone more easily and see inclusions. All of this of course is reversed when the diamond is properly cleaned